Video Highlights
- Another case, Guides v. ATF, is seeking Supreme Court review to overturn the ATF's current overreach on bump stocks
- Multiple courts of appeals have ruled the ATF's rule on bump stocks is an overreach and unconstitutional
- The case has an even better chance now with two other cases seeking Supreme Court review
- The landscape sets a perfect constitutional question and difference in opinions for the Supreme Court to review
- The key issue is whether Chevron deference should be given to the ATF's final rule on bump stocks or if the rule of lenity should be used instead
- The sixth circuit and the fifth circuit came to different conclusions on this issue
- The Guides case found that bump stocks are machine guns under the NFA and GCA
- The case has a circuit split, which increases its chances of Supreme Court review
- The Supreme Court typically grants review in cases with national significance and conflicting lower court decisions
- The bump stock rule has national significance and significant Second Amendment implications
- The Guida's case, along with two other cases, shows a serious circuit court split
- The Guida's case has previously been denied Supreme Court review, but now has a better chance
- The Cargill case may be the best option for Supreme Court review
- Liking, commenting, and subscribing to the channel helps support it and reach more people
Video Summary
Another bump stock lawsuit, Guides v. ATF, is seeking Supreme Court review to overturn the ATF's current overreach. This case comes after multiple courts of appeals have ruled that the ATF's rule on bump stocks is an overreach and unconstitutional. The case, Guides v. ATF, has an even better chance of Supreme Court review now that two other cases are also seeking review. This landscape sets up a perfect constitutional question and a difference in opinions for the Supreme Court to review. The key issue in these cases is whether Chevron deference should be given to the ATF's final rule on bump stocks or if a different rule, the rule of lenity, should be used instead. Different circuit courts have come to different conclusions on this issue. In the Guides case, the court found that bump stocks are considered machine guns under the National Firearms Act (NFA) and Gun Control Act (GCA). This case, along with the other two cases seeking review, creates a circuit split, which increases the chances of Supreme Court review. The Supreme Court typically grants review in cases with national significance and conflicting lower court decisions, both of which are present in the bump stock rule cases. The bump stock rule has national significance and significant Second Amendment implications. The Guida's case, which was previously denied Supreme Court review, now has a better chance given the circuit split and the other cases seeking review. The Cargill case may be the best option for Supreme Court review. Liking, commenting, and subscribing to the channel supports it and helps reach more people.
